OCCOM BILL wrote:Setanta wrote:So you claim, O'Bill. Do you contend that they ceased to be Amerians when they went overseas. Do you claim that no one is attacking them because they are Americans and it's easier to get at them there than it is here?
I made no such claims. The simple fact is; a random GI, by virtue of being a GI, is no expert on National Security, and tapping him to elucidate whether or not we are safer is an obvious example of
Argumentum ad misericordiam
Setanta wrote: I find your post nonsensical, O'Bill.
2 factual assertions in a single concise sentence hardly qualifies as nonsensical.
Your assertions were not factual, nor was i using
argumentum ad misericorciam. I was not appealing to anyone's pity, i was pointing out that those who hate America, and who are willing to take the risk, can go to Iraq to kill Americans. That is good evidence that this war has not lessened the risk to Americans from fanatical Muslim terrorism.
However, i am far more amused by your claim to have made factual "assertions."
[url=http://www.answers.com/topic/assertion][b]Answers-dot-com[/b][/url] wrote:assertion n.
1. The act of asserting.
2. Something declared or stated positively, often with no support or attempt at proof. (Answers-dot-com uses the American Heritage Dictionary for their source.)
There is no such thing of a factual assertion. Certainly you can assert that your claims are factual, but that will not make it so. It only becomes "factual" when you provide incontrovertible proof of your statements. Finally, i did not either claim that a GIs are expert on national security nor did i appeal to pity on behalf of them. So your response was neither factual, nor was it relevant. It was a non sequitur.
